| Message ID | 20241014162607.1247611-1-quic_mrana@quicinc.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Awaiting Upstream |
| Delegated to: | Krzysztof Wilczyński |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v3] PCI: starfive: Enable PCIe controller's runtime PM before probing host bridge | expand |
On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 09:26:07AM -0700, Mayank Rana wrote: > PCIe controller device (i.e. PCIe starfive device) is parent to PCIe host > bridge device. To enable runtime PM of PCIe host bridge device (child > device), it is must to enable parent device's runtime PM to avoid seeing > the below warning from PM core: > > pcie-starfive 940000000.pcie: Enabling runtime PM for inactive device > with active children > > Fix this issue by enabling starfive pcie controller device's runtime PM > before calling pci_host_probe() in plda_pcie_host_init(). > > Tested-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com> > Signed-off-by: Mayank Rana <quic_mrana@quicinc.com> > Reviewed-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org> I want this in the same series as Krishna's patch to turn on runtime PM of host bridges. That's how I know they need to be applied in order. If they're not in the same series, they're likely to be applied out of order.
Hi Bjorn On 10/14/2024 10:23 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 09:26:07AM -0700, Mayank Rana wrote: >> PCIe controller device (i.e. PCIe starfive device) is parent to PCIe host >> bridge device. To enable runtime PM of PCIe host bridge device (child >> device), it is must to enable parent device's runtime PM to avoid seeing >> the below warning from PM core: >> >> pcie-starfive 940000000.pcie: Enabling runtime PM for inactive device >> with active children >> >> Fix this issue by enabling starfive pcie controller device's runtime PM >> before calling pci_host_probe() in plda_pcie_host_init(). >> >> Tested-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com> >> Signed-off-by: Mayank Rana <quic_mrana@quicinc.com> >> Reviewed-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org> > > I want this in the same series as Krishna's patch to turn on runtime > PM of host bridges. That's how I know they need to be applied in > order. If they're not in the same series, they're likely to be > applied out of order.Thank you for quick response and suggestion. Hi Krishna Please add this proposed change as part of your changes to enable runtime PM of host bridges. Regards, Mayank
On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 12:23:21PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 09:26:07AM -0700, Mayank Rana wrote: > > PCIe controller device (i.e. PCIe starfive device) is parent to PCIe host > > bridge device. To enable runtime PM of PCIe host bridge device (child > > device), it is must to enable parent device's runtime PM to avoid seeing > > the below warning from PM core: > > > > pcie-starfive 940000000.pcie: Enabling runtime PM for inactive device > > with active children > > > > Fix this issue by enabling starfive pcie controller device's runtime PM > > before calling pci_host_probe() in plda_pcie_host_init(). > > > > Tested-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com> > > Signed-off-by: Mayank Rana <quic_mrana@quicinc.com> > > Reviewed-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org> > > I want this in the same series as Krishna's patch to turn on runtime > PM of host bridges. That's how I know they need to be applied in > order. If they're not in the same series, they're likely to be > applied out of order. There is no harm in applying this patch on its own. It fixes a legit issue of enabling the parent runtime PM before the child as required by the PM core. Rest of the controller drivers follow the same pattern. I fail to understand why you want this to be combined with Krishna's patch. That patch is only a trigger, but even without that patch the issue still exists (not user visible ofc). - Mani
On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 11:18:17PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 12:23:21PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 09:26:07AM -0700, Mayank Rana wrote: > > > PCIe controller device (i.e. PCIe starfive device) is parent to PCIe host > > > bridge device. To enable runtime PM of PCIe host bridge device (child > > > device), it is must to enable parent device's runtime PM to avoid seeing > > > the below warning from PM core: > > > > > > pcie-starfive 940000000.pcie: Enabling runtime PM for inactive device > > > with active children > > > > > > Fix this issue by enabling starfive pcie controller device's runtime PM > > > before calling pci_host_probe() in plda_pcie_host_init(). > > > > > > Tested-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com> > > > Signed-off-by: Mayank Rana <quic_mrana@quicinc.com> > > > Reviewed-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org> > > > > I want this in the same series as Krishna's patch to turn on runtime > > PM of host bridges. That's how I know they need to be applied in > > order. If they're not in the same series, they're likely to be > > applied out of order. > > There is no harm in applying this patch on its own. It fixes a legit > issue of enabling the parent runtime PM before the child as required > by the PM core. Rest of the controller drivers follow the same > pattern. > > I fail to understand why you want this to be combined with Krishna's > patch. That patch is only a trigger, but even without that patch the > issue still exists (not user visible ofc). I don't want it *combined* with Krishna's patch. I want this applied *before* Krishna's patch because if we apply Krishna's patch first, we have some interval where we report the "Enabling runtime PM for inactive device with active children" error. Bjorn
On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 01:08:41PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 11:18:17PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 12:23:21PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 09:26:07AM -0700, Mayank Rana wrote: > > > > PCIe controller device (i.e. PCIe starfive device) is parent to PCIe host > > > > bridge device. To enable runtime PM of PCIe host bridge device (child > > > > device), it is must to enable parent device's runtime PM to avoid seeing > > > > the below warning from PM core: > > > > > > > > pcie-starfive 940000000.pcie: Enabling runtime PM for inactive device > > > > with active children > > > > > > > > Fix this issue by enabling starfive pcie controller device's runtime PM > > > > before calling pci_host_probe() in plda_pcie_host_init(). > > > > > > > > Tested-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com> > > > > Signed-off-by: Mayank Rana <quic_mrana@quicinc.com> > > > > Reviewed-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org> > > > > > > I want this in the same series as Krishna's patch to turn on runtime > > > PM of host bridges. That's how I know they need to be applied in > > > order. If they're not in the same series, they're likely to be > > > applied out of order. > > > > There is no harm in applying this patch on its own. It fixes a legit > > issue of enabling the parent runtime PM before the child as required > > by the PM core. Rest of the controller drivers follow the same > > pattern. > > > > I fail to understand why you want this to be combined with Krishna's > > patch. That patch is only a trigger, but even without that patch the > > issue still exists (not user visible ofc). > > I don't want it *combined* with Krishna's patch. > > I want this applied *before* Krishna's patch because if we apply > Krishna's patch first, we have some interval where we report the > "Enabling runtime PM for inactive device with active children" error. > No, I was asking why can't this be applied *first* and then Kirshna's patch? Why do you want this to be again resent in a separate series? Both patches are in a mergeable state already. So they can be applied in order. - Mani
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 10:09:01AM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 01:08:41PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 11:18:17PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 12:23:21PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > > > On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 09:26:07AM -0700, Mayank Rana wrote: > > > > > PCIe controller device (i.e. PCIe starfive device) is parent to PCIe host > > > > > bridge device. To enable runtime PM of PCIe host bridge device (child > > > > > device), it is must to enable parent device's runtime PM to avoid seeing > > > > > the below warning from PM core: > > > > > > > > > > pcie-starfive 940000000.pcie: Enabling runtime PM for inactive device > > > > > with active children > > > > > > > > > > Fix this issue by enabling starfive pcie controller device's runtime PM > > > > > before calling pci_host_probe() in plda_pcie_host_init(). > > > > > > > > > > Tested-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mayank Rana <quic_mrana@quicinc.com> > > > > > Reviewed-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org> > > > > > > > > I want this in the same series as Krishna's patch to turn on runtime > > > > PM of host bridges. That's how I know they need to be applied in > > > > order. If they're not in the same series, they're likely to be > > > > applied out of order. > > > > > > There is no harm in applying this patch on its own. It fixes a legit > > > issue of enabling the parent runtime PM before the child as required > > > by the PM core. Rest of the controller drivers follow the same > > > pattern. > > > > > > I fail to understand why you want this to be combined with Krishna's > > > patch. That patch is only a trigger, but even without that patch the > > > issue still exists (not user visible ofc). > > > > I don't want it *combined* with Krishna's patch. > > > > I want this applied *before* Krishna's patch because if we apply > > Krishna's patch first, we have some interval where we report the > > "Enabling runtime PM for inactive device with active children" error. > > No, I was asking why can't this be applied *first* and then > Kirshna's patch? Why do you want this to be again resent in a > separate series? It can certainly be applied first. It's just that when they're posted separately, even with a comment in the email discussion to say "please apply A before B", it's extra work for whoever merges them and it makes it more likely to make mistakes like applying them in the wrong order, or one without the other, or putting them on separate branches. The usual way to say "B depends on A" is to post them together in a series with A followed by B. Bjorn
diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/plda/pcie-starfive.c b/drivers/pci/controller/plda/pcie-starfive.c index 0567ec373a3e..e73c1b7bc8ef 100644 --- a/drivers/pci/controller/plda/pcie-starfive.c +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/plda/pcie-starfive.c @@ -404,6 +404,9 @@ static int starfive_pcie_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) if (ret) return ret; + pm_runtime_enable(&pdev->dev); + pm_runtime_get_sync(&pdev->dev); + plda->host_ops = &sf_host_ops; plda->num_events = PLDA_MAX_EVENT_NUM; /* mask doorbell event */ @@ -413,11 +416,12 @@ static int starfive_pcie_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) plda->events_bitmap <<= PLDA_NUM_DMA_EVENTS; ret = plda_pcie_host_init(&pcie->plda, &starfive_pcie_ops, &stf_pcie_event); - if (ret) + if (ret) { + pm_runtime_put_sync(&pdev->dev); + pm_runtime_disable(&pdev->dev); return ret; + } - pm_runtime_enable(&pdev->dev); - pm_runtime_get_sync(&pdev->dev); platform_set_drvdata(pdev, pcie); return 0;